The gun-control proposals that President Obama and Governor Patrick have forwarded address some problems but not others. I would add the following three proposals.
In Massachusetts, raise the minimum mandatory sentence for possession of any unregistered gun to five years.
Comments
Any unregistered gun mandatory five years? No. Have you looked at the laws in this state, it is like looking at a bowl of spaghetti. People in this state have gotten very used to the idea of being "registered". What they do not know is that in most of the country, guns are NOT "registered". Why would you want to "register" them? Does a "registered" gun make it any less lethal? Any less likely to kill? How about this. . . use a gun in a crime and there is a mandatory five year sentence, that I can get behind.
Extensive buyback and gracious amnesty period? Want to do a buyback, fine go collect money from people who are are all fired up about getting "guns off the street". Don't dip into taxpayer dollars to do it, because the criminals aren't trading in their guns for a couple hundred measly dollars when they know they can rob more with them, or need them for protection in thousand dollar drug deals. "Gracious" amnesty, hmmm, is that for those who did not bother to "register" their guns when the state decided people should and were turned into felons? Like little old ladies with their deceased hubbies guns? Or is that for the gangster who murdered someone a few years ago and would like a little "amnesty" to beat a murder rap?
"Make gun owners liable for any harm done with their own gun that was not properly secured." WOW! First off, exactly who decides what is "not properly secured"? I can see it now: "M.G.L. 131, Sec X, Shall be stored in a vault constructed of 2 inch thick ...", actually not, there will no description, instead, it will be left hanging. No one will know what is "Properly", it will be at the whim of a judge or jury. More fear and scare tactics on the part of state. Actually, gun owners are not sure how they are supposed to store their guns now, under the twisted laws of this state. But let's get to the juicy part of this idea. I can get behind this, as long as everyone else is responsible for anything that is taken from them that harms another due their not "properly securing" it. Cars, knives, baseball bats, you name it. Don't hand me that "but guns are made only for killing, so they are a special case", does not matter, you did not lock your car up in a vault, teenager gets it and kills someone, YOUR FAULT for not "properly securing it", you could have foreseen it, kids steal cars everyday in this country.
Once again, ideas that are all about gun owners, not about the real problem: Young crazies. Oh, how about this, make the parents of those crazies responsible if they aren't shot by their own kid?
Another nice post History. Keep it up. As with many things in life, education of the ignorant can shed light on the truth.
Now you're talkin' HistoryisJustThat! Let's get off it's guns that do the shooting--yes, and they SAVE more than they kill. Hannity had an enlightening program recently with many law officers who demonstrated through their own experiences, examples of the PROTECTIVE uses of guns. Let's turn this argument around and begin focusing on what we can do to make guns work FOR US. I wouldn't want my support for banning guns that leads to the maiming and death of an innocent person, to be on my conscience. Let's retain the ABILITY of law abiders to choose the right to defend themselves.
Perfect! thank you!